Alexander Maslaris1,2, Georgios Spyrou3, Carsten Schoeneberg3, Mustafa Citak4, Georg Matziolis5. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, Waldkliniken Eisenberg, Chair of the Jena University Hospital, Klosterlausnitzer Str. 81, 07607, Eisenberg, Germany. alexander_maslaris@hotmail.com. 2. Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Alfried-Krupp Hospital Essen, Alfried-Krupp-Straße 21, 45131, Essen, Germany. alexander_maslaris@hotmail.com. 3. Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Alfried-Krupp Hospital Essen, Alfried-Krupp-Straße 21, 45131, Essen, Germany. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, HELIOS ENDO-Clinic Hamburg, Holstenstraße, 222767, Hamburg, Germany. 5. Department of Orthopaedics, Waldkliniken Eisenberg, Chair of the Jena University Hospital, Klosterlausnitzer Str. 81, 07607, Eisenberg, Germany.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: While re-revision total knee arthroplasty (ReRTKA) steadily increases, the ease and bone-sparing removal of RTKA implants is gaining more and more in importance. Biomechanical data suggest that cemented conical stems can be removed significantly easier than cylindrical stems. However, no clinical evidence exists supporting this observation. Aim of this study was to compare the revisability and need for osteotomy (OT) between removals of well-fixed cemented conical vs. cylindrical RTKA stems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 55 removals of well-fixed full-cemented RTKA stems (29 knees) performed between 2016 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Main outcome variables were: bone loss, fractures, osteotomy incidence, surgery duration, early postoperative complications (EPC), hemoglobin drop and blood transfusion. SPSS was used for the statistical analysis. RESULTS: 44.8% were conical, 48.3% cylindrical, and 6.9% combined stem designs. Causes for re-revision were PJI (75.9%), malposition (17.2%) and persistent pain (6.9%). 10 stem removals (18.2%) required an OT (four femoral, six tibial): eight stems (14.5%) had cylindrical and two (3.6%) conical designs (P = 0.041). Fractures were noted solely in removals without OT (11.1% vs. 0%,). There was a tendency to more bone loss in cylindrical stem revisions (53.8% vs. 32%, P = 0.24). A longer overall surgery time was observed in revisions of cylindrical stems (+ 37 min, P = 0.05). There was higher hemoglobin drop and need for blood transfusion in revisions of cylindrical stems or after OT but without reaching statistical significance. The EPC rates were slightly higher in ReRTKA on cylindrical stems (P = 0.28). CONCLUSION: Well-fixed cemented conical stems may be revision friendlier with less demands on OT and shorter overall surgery time than cemented cylindrical stems.
INTRODUCTION: While re-revision total knee arthroplasty (ReRTKA) steadily increases, the ease and bone-sparing removal of RTKA implants is gaining more and more in importance. Biomechanical data suggest that cemented conical stems can be removed significantly easier than cylindrical stems. However, no clinical evidence exists supporting this observation. Aim of this study was to compare the revisability and need for osteotomy (OT) between removals of well-fixed cemented conical vs. cylindrical RTKA stems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 55 removals of well-fixed full-cemented RTKA stems (29 knees) performed between 2016 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Main outcome variables were: bone loss, fractures, osteotomy incidence, surgery duration, early postoperative complications (EPC), hemoglobin drop and blood transfusion. SPSS was used for the statistical analysis. RESULTS: 44.8% were conical, 48.3% cylindrical, and 6.9% combined stem designs. Causes for re-revision were PJI (75.9%), malposition (17.2%) and persistent pain (6.9%). 10 stem removals (18.2%) required an OT (four femoral, six tibial): eight stems (14.5%) had cylindrical and two (3.6%) conical designs (P = 0.041). Fractures were noted solely in removals without OT (11.1% vs. 0%,). There was a tendency to more bone loss in cylindrical stem revisions (53.8% vs. 32%, P = 0.24). A longer overall surgery time was observed in revisions of cylindrical stems (+ 37 min, P = 0.05). There was higher hemoglobin drop and need for blood transfusion in revisions of cylindrical stems or after OT but without reaching statistical significance. The EPC rates were slightly higher in ReRTKA on cylindrical stems (P = 0.28). CONCLUSION: Well-fixed cemented conical stems may be revision friendlier with less demands on OT and shorter overall surgery time than cemented cylindrical stems.
Authors: Michael B Geary; David M Macknet; Michael P Ransone; Susan D Odum; Bryan D Springer Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2020-05-28 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: S M Javad Mortazavi; Jeremy Molligan; Matthew S Austin; James J Purtill; William J Hozack; Javad Parvizi Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2010-10-21 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Steven M Kurtz; Edmund Lau; Kevin Ong; Ke Zhao; Michael Kelly; Kevin J Bozic Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2009-04-10 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Martin Lindberg-Larsen; Christoffer C Jørgensen; Jens Bagger; Henrik M Schrøder; Henrik Kehlet Journal: Acta Orthop Date: 2016-02-22 Impact factor: 3.717
Authors: Peter L Lewis; Stephen E Graves; Otto Robertsson; Martin Sundberg; Elizabeth W Paxton; Heather A Prentice; Annette W-Dahl Journal: Acta Orthop Date: 2020-04-14 Impact factor: 3.717